ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2021
Machine Learning Model to Identify Sepsis Patients in the Emergency Department: Algorithm Development and Validation.
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating Artificial Intelligence for Sepsis Prediction in Emergency Departments: A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis.Journal of medical systems · 2026Pooled it
- Revolutionizing sepsis diagnosis using machine learning and deep learning models: a systematic literature review.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Pooled it
- Early detection of sepsis using machine learning algorithms: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Predicting sepsis onset in ICU using machine learning models: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2023Pooled it
- Predicting knowledge of cervical cancer screening among reproductive-age women in sub-saharan africa using machine learning algorithms.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Interpretable admission-stage machine learning for early Sepsis-3 identification in the emergency department.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Review
- The role of artificial intelligence in sepsis in the Emergency Department: a narrative review.Annals of translational medicine · 2025Review
- Machine learning in diagnostic support in medical emergency departments.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- A scoping review of machine learning for sepsis prediction- feature engineering strategies and model performance: a step towards explainability.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Article
- Use of Artificial Intelligence in Triage in Hospital Emergency Departments: A Scoping Review.Cureus · 2024Article
- Preserving multi-dimensional information: A hypersphere method for parameter space analysis.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Advancements in Artificial Intelligence in Emergency Medicine in Taiwan: A Narrative Review.Journal of acute medicine · 2024Article
- Machine Learning for Early Prediction of Sepsis in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) Patients.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- Development and validation of a machine learning model integrated with the clinical workflow for early detection of sepsis.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Impact of an electronic alert system for pediatric sepsis screening a tertiary hospital experience.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Artificial intelligence-assisted phenotyping of sepsis: Research progress, clinical challenges, and translational prospects.Digital healthReview
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate stratification of sepsis can effectively guide the triage of patient care and shared decision making in the emergency department (ED). However, previous research on sepsis identification models focused mainly on ICU patients, and discrepancies in model performance between the development and external validation datasets are rarely evaluated. The aim of our study was to develop and externally validate a machine learning model to stratify sepsis patients in the ED. We retrospectively collected clinical data from two geographically separate institutes that provided a different level of care at different time periods. The Sepsis-3 criteria were used as the reference standard in both datasets for identifying true sepsis cases. An eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) algorithm was developed to stratify sepsis patients and the performance of the model was compared with traditional clinical sepsis tools; quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS). There were 8296 patients (1752 (21%) being septic) in the development and 1744 patients (506 (29%) being septic) in the external validation datasets. The mortality of septic patients in the development and validation datasets was 13.5% and 17%, respectively. In the internal validation, XGBoost achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.86, exceeding SIRS (0.68) and qSOFA (0.56). The performance of XGBoost deteriorated in the external validation (the AUROC of XGBoost, SIRS and qSOFA was 0.75, 0.57 and 0.66, respectively). Heterogeneity in patient characteristics, such as sepsis prevalence, severity, age, comorbidity and infection focus, could reduce model performance. Our model showed good discriminative capabilities for the identification of sepsis patients and outperformed the existing sepsis identification tools. Implementation of the ML model in the ED can facilitate timely sepsis identification and treatment. However, dataset discrepancies should be carefully evaluated before implementing the ML approach in clinical practice. This finding reinforces the necessity for future studies to perform external validation to ensure the generalisability of any developed ML approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.